Today’s Herald editorial is rather confused. They mix up the Local Electoral Act and Electoral Act, and also do not know how MMP works with by-elections.

Anonymous donations should not be permitted at all but they have been allowed under strict conditions because political parties say few wealthy or corporate donors would contribute if their names had to be made public.

Anonymous donations are basically not permitted under the Electoral Act, unless they are of relatively small amounts (under $1,500), or are done through the Electoral Commission with strict declarations. However the Local Electoral Act is very very different and does have any strict conditions at all. They have in fact no conditions, except a badly worded definition of an anonymous donation.

This case warrants a reconsideration of campaign finance law to require the naming of all contributors of more than $1000 to a candidate or party.

Again the Herald seems confused – are they talking the Electoral Act or the Local Electoral Act or both? The reference to parties suggest the Electoral Act.

Again the Electoral Act already bans anonymous donations of greater than $1,500. And candidates must disclose the names of all donors of over $1,500, while parties must disclose donors of over $15,000 (which is a sum which represents around 0.5% of a major party’s revenue).

The Local Electoral Act has no ban at all on anonymous donations, but requires disclosure of donations of over $1,000 already.

His departure would create a byelection in Epsom that National would need Act to win if the Government was to retain its majority.

Totally incorrect. If National won the by-election they would go from 59 to 60 seats in the House and with United Future would have a majority.

Related posts:

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 1st, 2012 at 8:49 am and is filed under NZ Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Let’s accept that Banksie is de jure on the right side of the law and put this to one side.

His handling of the politics is woeful, he needed to front with it and move on; instead there was a pile of “i can’t recalls….” around dotcom. As these get stripped away one at a time he looks worse and worse.

He’ll be legally cleared i’m sure, but forever tainted in the public eye.

If National won the by-election they would go from 59 to 60 seats in the House and with United Future would have a majority.

Oh DPF, you forgot to mention the MAORI PARTY. National could also rely on their other coalition partner, the MAORI PARTY.

[DPF: Not forgot. It is well known that while National could govern with the Maori Party holding balance of power, they would be unable to advance much of their agenda, as their agreement does not bind the MP to vote for it]

This is an awful mistake by the Herald . . . if they are writing about electoral law then they must use an expert . . . whats the use of all those people doing politics degrees if the biggest newspaper in the country does not even consult them?

Nick K: It IS bloody embarrassing isnt it? You are a few years younger than me, but remember when we had real political journalism on the telly rather than Patrick Gower chasing pollys around buildings??

“If National won the by-election they would go from 59 to 60 seats in the House”

How can this be?

The number of National seats is determined by its share of the country-wide vote, and nothing else. It can’t get more than 59 votes, no matter how many electorate seats it might pick up. If Goldsmith were to go in from Epsom, he wouldn’t be replaced on the National list.

The days of drifting down the river on the ACT cabbage boat are over. Banks is, and I am calling it right now, a complete fucking nutter and the $20 membership renewal shall not be forthcoming unless the cabbage is thrown overboard…

Time they all got off the fence hoping it will get better and put an end to the slow-dying embarrassment, rolled Banks ASAP and installed David Seymour and Catherine Isaac as temporary Leaders of a new centre-right political vehicle until it is worked out what that vehicle is and who is to lead it.

He doesn’t even need to resign before the election. He can stand, make sure he wins, and THEN resign as long as he does it before the final result is declared about three weeks after the election. Then he would become the MP for the electorate and they get to replace him on the list.